CCS in Industrial Processes

John DavisonIEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme

Cheltenham, UK

Workshop organised by the Swiss Federal Office of Energy

Bern, 1st September 2014

2

IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEAGHG)

established in 1991 by the International Energy Agency

Aim: To provide information on the role that technology can play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from use of fossil fuels.

Objective, independent, policy relevant but not policy prescriptive

Focus on CCS

Activities:

Technical studies - over 250, freely available to our member countries

Organise networks of researchers, conferences and summer schools

Provide information to policy makers and regulators

3

Industrial Sources of CO2

About a quarter of global emissions

A large proportion of emissions are in developing countries

Source: IEA/UNIDO Technology

Roadmap, Carbon capture and

storage in industrial

applications, 2011

4

Cement Production

CaCO3 → CaO + CO2

Mill

Flue gas

Fuel

Clinker

Precalciner

Rotary kiln

e.g. CaO + SiO2 etc →calcium silicates etc

Fuel

Cement

Additives

Preheaters

(multiple stages)

Hot gas

Cooler

1350°C

900°C

Limestone

etc.

Mill and drier

Around 60% of the CO2 is from decomposition of limestone

Cannot be avoided by use of non-fossil energy sources

5

Post Combustion CaptureSolvent scrubbing

CO2 to

storage

Fuel

Cement

plant

Solvent

scrubbingESP, SCR,

FGD

Air

Power

CO2-reduced

flue gas

CHP plant Steam

CO2

compression

Coal

Clinker

Solvent

stripping

Raw

meal

24%

CO2

6

Post-combustion Capture

Advantages for cement plantsFlue gas CO2 concentration is high (around 24%vol.)

o Advantageous, particularly for alternative capture technologies

The cement plant itself is unaffectedo But more stringent flue gas cleaning may be needed

Retrofit to existing plants is possibleo Provided space is available and CO2 can be transported off site

DisadvantagesA large quantity of low pressure steam is needed for solvent stripping, requiring an on-site CHP plant

o Coal is usually available at cement plants but coal CHP plants have relatively high investment costs and high emissions

o Natural gas CHP plants have lower investment costs

7

Oxy-Combustion CapturePrecalciner and kiln

Clinker

Vent gas

Fuel

Raw

Mill

Purification/

compression

Precalciner

Air

separation

Raw

meal

Oxygen

CO2

Recycled flue gas

KilnPreheater

FuelFlue gas

Hot

gas

Air

8

Oxy-combustion Capture Pre-calciner only

Clinker

Air

Vent gas

Fuel

Raw

Mill

Purification/

compression

Precalciner

Air

separation

Raw

meal

Oxygen

CO2

Recycled flue gas

Preheater 1Kiln

Preheater 2

FuelFlue gas

Hot gas

Air

9

Oxy-combustion Capture

Advantages for cement plantsLow oxygen consumption

o 1/3 of the amount of O2 is needed per tonne of CO2 captured, compared to a coal fired boiler

Potentially low cost process

DisadvantagesRetrofit may be more difficult

Involves changes to the core cement processo Impacts on plant design and chemistry etc.

10

Status of Cement Plant CCS

Post combustion captureTest centre for small scale and pilot trials at a cement plant, Norcem, Brevik, Norway

o Amine scrubbing, Dry adsorption, Membranes, Ca looping

ITRI/Taiwan Cement Corp.o 1t/h CO2 calcium looping unit

Skyonic Corp, Texas

o 83 kt/y CO2 plant at a cement plant, NaOH + CO2→ NaHCO3

Oxy-combustionLaboratory studies ECRA, Germany

Pre-calciner pilot plant, Denmark, o Lafarge, FL Smidth, Air Products, c1t/h CO2

11

Oil Refineries

Many CO2 emission sources

Complex plants - all are different

Space can be a constraint for retrofits

Design standards for capture plants at refineries may be different to power plants

Potentially higher costs

12

13

14

15

Emissions from Simple and Complex Refineries

Data from CONCAWE 2011

CDU: Crude distillation unit

VDU: Vacuum distillation unit

FCC: Fluid catalytic cracker

16

CO2 Capture at Refineries

Post combustion capture

Fired heaters, fluid catalytic cracker and utility steam and power generation

Centralised solvent stripping may be feasible

Pre-combustion capture

Hydrogen plants (steam reforming, residue gasif.)

Hydrogen could also be used in fired heaters and utility steam and power generation

Oxy-combustion

Fired heaters and steam/power generation

Fluid catalytic crackers

17

Capture from Refinery Flue gasTest Centre Mongstad, Norway

2 capture plants: Amine and Chilled Ammonia processes

100,000t/y CO2 capture

Flue gases from the refinery:

Combined cycle power plant

Fluid catalytic cracker

18

Oxy-Combustion FCC

Courtesy: CCP / Petrobras

Retrofit at Petrobras research facility, Brazil

1t/d CO2

Operated 2011-12

CCP consider oxy-combustion to be viable and competitive with post combustion capture for FCCs

19

Capture at a Hydrogen PlantAir Products, Port Arthur, Texas

• Capture retrofit to 2 steam methane reformer units

• Vacuum swing adsorption process

• 1Mt/y CO2 for EOR

• >90% CO2 capture

• Started operation Dec. 2012 / March 2013

Existing SMR

VSA Vessels

20

Capture of CO2 from 3 steam methane reformer units

H2 provided to the Athabasca Oil Sand Upgrader

Shell amine technology (ADIP-X system based on MDEA/Pz)

~1.2 million tonne of CO2/y

Saline Aquifer with potential EOR application

Operation starts 2015/16

Capture at a Hydrogen PlantShell Quest Project, Canada

21

Natural Gas ProcessingCO2 sometimes has to be separated from natural gas to satisfy purity standards

Separation is usually by amine scrubbing, e.g. MDEA

Physical solvents and low temperature separation are also used for high CO2 gas

CO2 just has to be compressed and dried

Several million tonnes/year of CO2 separated from natural gas is used for EOR

CO2 is also used for storage demonstration projects

22

CO2 Capture in Gas Production

Sleipner, Norway; 9% CO2, Around 1 Mt/y CO2 captured Snøhvit, Norway; 5-8% CO2

Around 0.7 Mt/y CO2 captured

In Salah, Algeria; up to 10% CO2

Around 1.2 Mt/y CO2 capturedLaBarge, USA; 65% CO2,

Around 6 Mt/y CO2 capturedand used for EOR

23

Other High Purity CO2 SourcesBio-ethanol production

Dacatur project, USA, 1Mt/y CO2

Synthetic natural gas from coal

Dakota Gasification plant, USA, ~2.5Mt/y CO2

Coal-based chemicals plants

Coffeyville ammonia plant, USA, ~0.7Mt/y CO2

Many Chinese coal to chemicals plants

24

Capture at Iron and Steel Plants

2

Steel plants are complex integrated plants with many sources of emissions

Blast furnaces are the core of most large plants

Chemical reduction of iron oxide to iron

The focus of capture R&D, e.g Europe (ULCOS project), Japan (COURSE 50 project), and Korea

New iron and steel processes with integrated capture are being developed

25

Oxy-Blast Furnace Top Gas Recycling

Courtesy: Tata Steel

26

Technical Issues for CCS in Industries

CO2 capture technologies are well proven for some industries but not others

Need to demonstrate CCS, particularly in cement, iron and steel and refineries

Different CO2 concentrations and pressures

Impacts of different impurities

Operational profiles etc.

Develop and demonstrate new processes with integrated CO2 capture

Learn from technology demonstrations in the power sector

27

Costs of CCS in Industries

Shortage of information on industrial CCS costs

Especially for developing countries, where most industrial emissions occur

Estimating costs is difficult

Different costs for each CO2 source at each site

Partial capture of CO2 at a site may be preferred

28

Industrial CCS Costs

IEA CCS Technology Roadmap 2013

‘Low Hanging Fruit’

29

Economics of Industrial CCSSome industrial capture is already economic

CO2 is sold, particularly for EOR

Economic incentives for industrial CCS without CO2

utilisation in most countries are low or zero

Industrial products are traded globally, unlike electricity

Transfer of production to countries with low GHG abatement requirements may be the most attractive choice for industries

A significant challenge for policy makers

30

ConclusionsTechnology status

CO2 is already captured in some industries but is at a relatively early stage of development in other industries

Further R&D and demonstration is needed, particularly for iron and steel, cement and oil refineries

Industries can learn from deployment of CO2 capture technologies in the power industry

EconomicsIndustrial CCS cost estimates have high uncertainties

EOR can make some industrial CCS economic but further incentives are needed in most cases

Agreements are needed to minimise the risk of industries re-locating to countries where CCS is not required

31

Thank you

john.davison@ieaghg.org